Putin Laughed off Threats From Barack 'Red Line' Obama; Are We About to See Red Line Déjà Vu All Over Again?

(Alexei Druzhinin, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)

New York Yankee Hall-of-Famer Yogi Berra’s “Yogi-isms” were almost as famous as Yogi, himself, one of which was “It ain’t over ’til it’s over,” another; “It’s déjà vu all over again.”

Barack Obama’s presidency has been over for four years, but it sure feels like déjà vu all over again with Joe Biden set to become the 46th president of the United States in just 29 days. Arguably, along with his pal, Communist China strongman Xi Jinping, Russia’s Vladimir Putin couldn’t be more pleased about the prospects of a Biden presidency.

Putin’s likely glee over the thought of addled old Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. plopped behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office can be encapsulated in two words: “red line.”

Before we continue with the relevance of a Biden presidency to “red line,” let’s first jump into the Wayback Machine and revisit one of the “finest” [sarc] moments of Chicago Jesus’s reign on his self-gilded throne the Obama presidency.

As reported in 2017 by the New Orleans Advocate:

The use of chemical weapons by Syrian forces would be crossing a “red line” requiring American military intervention, President Barack Obama declared in 2012. A year later, Syrian President Bashar Assad did just that, firing rockets filled with sarin gas into towns around Damascus, killing an estimated 1,400 civilians.

Obama delivered a nationally televised address on Sept. 10, 2013, making a passionate and cogent argument for why U.S. intervention would be in the best interest of the nation and the world.

“If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons,” Obama said.

[But Obama did fail to act. Even worse, he later agreed to allow Putin’s Russia to oversee Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons. Go figure.]

[Obama further pontificated:] “As the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas and using them. Over time, our troops would again face the prospect of chemical weapons on the battlefield. And it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons, and use them to attack civilians.”

Syria agreed to dismantle its chemical weapons stockpiles, the Russians said, in exchange for escaping punishment for its war crimes.

“Assad gave up his chemical weapons,” Obama told the American public in May 2015. “That’s not speculation on our part. That, in fact, has been confirmed by the organization internationally that is charged with eliminating chemical weapons.”

Obama was either lying, misinformed, out of the loop, or a combination of all three.

As also reported by the New Orleans Advocate, at least 75 people were killed in northern Syria on April 4, 2017, after being exposed to a toxic gas that survivors said was dropped from airplanes. Moreover, U.S. officials at the time told several news outlets that there was evidence that the Russians knew about the attack in advance and did nothing to stop it.

One week after Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s gassing of innocent civilians, President Trump ordered a cruise-missile strike against a Syrian airbase in response to the chemical attack. Barack Obama and Joe Biden were unavailable for comment. [sarc]

That was then, this is now.

In a Sunday article titled Rubio Throws Down on Alleged Russian Massive Cyber-Attack: ‘America Must Retaliate, and Not Just With Sanctions’, I included an account of a massive cyber-attack last week against multiple U.S. agencies, including the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, and the U.S. Treasury, as reported by Politico:

The Department of Energy has found evidence that the hackers behind the massive and sophisticated cyber operation breached networks at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, two national laboratories, a DOE field office, and a division of the National Nuclear Security Administration. […]

DOE, which manages the nation’s nuclear arsenal, joins the six previously known federal victims: the departments of Treasury, Homeland Security, State and Agriculture; the National Institutes of Health, and the Commerce Department’s telecommunications policy agency.

U.S. officials believe that the campaign, in which hackers infected software updates for an IT monitoring program made by a company called SolarWinds, is the work of a Russian intelligence agency known for careful, stealthy, long-term operations.

Remember the WWJD bracelets? “What would Jesus do?”

Welp, we must now ask ourselves, for the foreseeable future, at least, What would Joe do? More specifically, in this case, what would Joe do about a substantiated and successful effort by Russian hackers to infiltrate the most sensitive agencies of the United States government?

The Most Trusted Name in News™ [sarc] knows. The Most Trusted Name in News™ knows “everything.” As reported by CNN, here’s “what Joe would do,” or is at least considering — given that he even understands what “he” is considering:

The President-elect and his team are preparing a “cost imposition strategy” to respond to Russia — not just for the hack, if Moscow is responsible, but for Russia’s other disruptive actions also — measures that will include but won’t be limited to sanctions, according to a source close to Biden.

“A good defense isn’t enough,” the President-elect said in a Thursday statement about the hack that did not mention Russia by name. “We need to disrupt and deter our adversaries from undertaking significant cyberattacks in the first place.

We will do that by, among other things, imposing substantial costs on those responsible for such malicious attacks, including in coordination with our allies and partners.”

When asked about the hack in a Thursday “interview” [BWAHAHAHAHA] with Stephen Colbert, Biden promised that “individuals as well as entities will find they have, there are financial repercussions for what they did.”

Notice how Biden, as was the case with globalist Barack Obama, included the globalist-required line, “in coordination with our allies and partners” in his comments? Yeah, get used to that — just as we were used to it during eight long years of the Obama regime.

O’s proudest international moments usually included throwing Israel and Bibi Netanyahu under the bus as far as he could — even better if he could do so at the corrupt as hell United Nations — while simultaneously sucking up to the Palestinians for all it was worth, including their pesky terrorist arm, Hamas, who had a proclivity for indiscriminately lobbing mortar shells into Israeli neighborhoods.

While Joe’s word salad might have sounded all presidential and stuff to Democrats and the Democrat State Media, Biden was not only a central member of the Obama administration; he also plans to fill his administration with other members Obama & Co. As noted by the Daily Wire, “the chances that Biden’s supposedly firm words will spark even the smallest quiver of fear from Vladimir Putin or his allies is [sic] laughably minimal.”

In addition to Barack “Red Line” Obama’s Syrian chemical weapons debacle, Crimea stands out as well, as also noted by Daily Wire.

Obama’s inaction was the only consistent variable in his strategy for Russia. During his time in office, with Biden by his side, “Russia annexed Crimea, invaded eastern Ukraine, intervened in Syria, and hacked the Clinton campaign and the DNC.”

And who can forget the Obama’s insipid arrogance during his 2012 debate with Mitt Romney, saying “the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”

While Democrats applauded this “zinger,” Mitt Romney was right and Obama was wrong, and we are still paying the price. As we stand on the eve of a Biden administration, what does this mean in practice for the ongoing struggle with Russia, and more broadly, our foreign policy?

What it means, in part, is déjà vu all over again.

During the eight years of the Obama presidency, Biden was arguably not nearly the globalist Obama was. Obama entered the presidency a staunch advocate of globalism. One need look no further than Obama’s “Dreams From My Father” to understand the magnitude of just how committed O was — and remains — to the “Global Community.”

But the Democrat Party of 2021 — of which Joe Biden is the vacuous hood ornament — is not the Democrat Party of the Obama years. Nancy and Chucky are under insidious pressure from Social Barbie Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, her “Squad,” and other far-left Democrat lawmakers to the point of open warfare, particularly given the drubbing suffered by the House Democrat Caucus in last month’s election.

So here’s Joe. An addled old man who half the time doesn’t know which state he’s in, confuses his wife with his sister, thinks Corn Pop was a “bad dude,” and believes that everyone has a right to “badakathcare.” The point being, Biden will be pulled in all directions, at all times, as the Democrat Party continues its circular firing squad over its future.

To believe that Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, “Little Rocket Man,” and the rest of the world’s bad guys aren’t tickled pink — or red, as it were — over the notion of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. plopped behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, would be a game for fools, at best; and likely, a far more serious “game.”